> -----Original Message----- > From: Joe Touch [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2016 2:12 AM > To: Xuxiaohu; Fred Baker (fred); Wassim Haddad > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Int-area] Call for adoption of draft-xu-intarea-ip-in-udp-03 > > > > On 5/24/2016 7:01 PM, Xuxiaohu wrote: > > [Xiaohu] Trying to address each flaw as it is raised is not what we > > IETF attendees are expected to do for any draft in the IETF? > > Yes, addressing flaws is what you're supposed to do - in a draft update (which > hasn't happened in the year since they were raised). > > However, you ignored the other issues that come up when this doc is considered > for WG adoption - do we need it?
Not ignored. I just need to confirm whether it's worthwhile to be fixed in practice (i.e., in the real target network environment) before fixing them. > You haven't made that case. If this were critical to Softwires, they wouldn't > have > shut down before they had a solution. You already note that this approach is > more limited in use than the more general solutions that are already deployed. There is no free lunch. More general means more complex. That's why both fruit knives and Swiss Army knives are sold in the market. BTW, what are the more general solutions that are already deployed in my mind? Xiaohu > Joe _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
